BCHNBTC
BCHN / Bitcoin
crypto

You run the node that enforces the consensus rules you care about.
The BTC people are a bit misguided because they believe that users running nodes has some kind of influence on consensus.
It does, but only indirectly.
Put it this way: whose node do you think matters more? Joe User's node that only processes and relays his own transactions, or Coinbase's node that processes millions of dollars of volume daily?
In the case of contention in the consensus rules - say, there was a dispute with some BCH upgrade or something - Coinbase announcing that they're gonna go with some version of BCHN vs another will have much more persuasive power in terms of the rest of the ecosystem following them, compared to Joe User announcing the same.
Joe User can of course continue to use the node that enforces his preferred consensus rules. But if the rest of the ecosystem (hashpower and actual economic activity) migrates elsewhere, then Joe will only be able to transact with other people that made the same decision. This is obviously a catastrophic blow to the network effects that Joe otherwise had access to.
Likewise, Coinbase could actually be in the minority themselves - but users and businesses that rely on Coinbase's services would be shooting themselves in the foot if they did not follow their decision. Those users and businesses could decide against Coinbase, but it once again boils down to network effects and availability of liquidity.
To make this concrete: sure, I could use Euros in USA. But will I find anyone who will actually accept Euro? Doubtful. I have the freedom to use any currency (network) I wish - but the network/currency is only as good as what I can exchange it for and who I can exchange it with.
So tl;dr: user nodes matter, but not in the way BTC people say.

You run the node that enforces the consensus rules you care about.
The BTC people are a bit misguided because they believe that users running nodes has some kind of influence on consensus.
It does, but only indirectly.
Put it this way: whose node do you think matters more? Joe User's node that only processes and relays his own transactions, or Coinbase's node that processes millions of dollars of volume daily?
In the case of contention in the consensus rules - say, there was a dispute with some BCH upgrade or something - Coinbase announcing that they're gonna go with some version of BCHN vs another will have much more persuasive power in terms of the rest of the ecosystem following them, compared to Joe User announcing the same.
Joe User can of course continue to use the node that enforces his preferred consensus rules. But if the rest of the ecosystem (hashpower and actual economic activity) migrates elsewhere, then Joe will only be able to transact with other people that made the same decision. This is obviously a catastrophic blow to the network effects that Joe otherwise had access to.
Likewise, Coinbase could actually be in the minority themselves - but users and businesses that rely on Coinbase's services would be shooting themselves in the foot if they did not follow their decision. Those users and businesses could decide against Coinbase, but it once again boils down to network effects and availability of liquidity.
To make this concrete: sure, I could use Euros in USA. But will I find anyone who will actually accept Euro? Doubtful. I have the freedom to use any currency (network) I wish - but the network/currency is only as good as what I can exchange it for and who I can exchange it with.
So tl;dr: user nodes matter, but not in the way BTC people say.